Chella Choi Cheating. What is the LPGA doing about it?

[Natural Patrick]

On 8/26/2014 at 2:17 PM, Web Junky said:

On the plus side, she has nice legs!

I bet she eats pumpkins.

[jkelley9]

3 hours ago, iacas said:

Because, unlike the other sports, the players are effectively their own umpires or referees or rules officials, too (not by definition, but I think you know what I mean).

That's not really the case in any other sport.

I do see yall's point. I get that. I just have such a hard time coming to grips with a huge punishment for something so infinitesimally small. But I do get that it's skeevy and brings to light her character as a whole and we have to make an example to make sure nobody does this type of crap again.

Just blows my mind that such a small (statistically insignificant) infraction could warrant such an outrage. But I guess it stems from the inherent fragility of the officiating system of the game we play.

[iacas]

57 minutes ago, jkelley9 said:

I do see yall's point. I get that. I just have such a hard time coming to grips with a huge punishment for something so infinitesimally small. But I do get that it's skeevy and brings to light her character as a whole and we have to make an example to make sure nobody does this type of crap again.

Just blows my mind that such a small (statistically insignificant) infraction could warrant such an outrage. But I guess it stems from the inherent fragility of the officiating system of the game we play.

Fragility?

In your mind you see it as a small thing. Cool. Others see any cheating as a big deal.

[jkelley9]

3 minutes ago, iacas said:

Fragility?

In your mind you see it as a small thing. Cool. Others see any cheating as a big deal.

Maybe I'm not making myself clear (very possible). I feel like what she did was wrong, since it's a rule of golf and she knowingly disobeyed it. I also don't see her act of cheating as a small thing. I see the actual marginal statistical advantage she gave herself as being small. That doesn't make her actions any better; again I see your point that cheating is cheating. 

Regarding my fragility comment, I used the wrong word. My bad. I meant to say that it's susceptible or more vulnerable to cheating. I didn't mean it in a "weak" or "broken" connotation. It's just susceptible because we have to almost exclusively rely on players' integrity. I also don't like how our sport differentiates itself so far from other sports in that we have no (real) game officials. 

Extending my "small" comment, I find the rule to be kind of... odd, and small. Again, it doesn't take away from her breaking that rule, it's just the rule itself seems laughable. But this thread isn't about the rule itself so I won't go into it any more.

You also say others view cheating as a big deal (implying that I do not). If the game of golf had refs like in other sports (bear with me), would those same people then be okay with what Choi did? Would it not still be cheating? Would it just be "part of the nature of the game, to gain a competitive edge?" 

[iacas]

1 hour ago, jkelley9 said:

I also don't see her act of cheating as a small thing. I see the actual marginal statistical advantage she gave herself as being small.

Her act was small. The intent is what's big, yes.

1 hour ago, jkelley9 said:

Regarding my fragility comment, I used the wrong word. My bad. I meant to say that it's susceptible or more vulnerable to cheating. I didn't mean it in a "weak" or "broken" connotation. It's just susceptible because we have to almost exclusively rely on players' integrity. I also don't like how our sport differentiates itself so far from other sports in that we have no (real) game officials.

What you dislike is one of the things I like most about the game. I like that, generally speaking, players can police themselves.

Failing to do that and even going so far as to cheat is what makes the act of cheating such a big deal.

1 hour ago, jkelley9 said:

Extending my "small" comment, I find the rule to be kind of... odd, and small. Again, it doesn't take away from her breaking that rule, it's just the rule itself seems laughable. But this thread isn't about the rule itself so I won't go into it any more.

The rule isn't laughable or small because it would be foolish to try to define a point at which the failure to replace the ball on the spot is significant enough to warrant a penalty. How close is close enough? Half an inch? One inch? Does it depend on the length of the shot?

1 hour ago, jkelley9 said:

You also say others view cheating as a big deal (implying that I do not). If the game of golf had refs like in other sports (bear with me), would those same people then be okay with what Choi did? Would it not still be cheating? Would it just be "part of the nature of the game, to gain a competitive edge?" 

I'm not particularly interested in hypotheticals. No offense. The game of golf is not like other sports.

And that's one of the things I like most about it.

[Fourputt]

12 hours ago, jkelley9 said:

Maybe I'm not making myself clear (very possible). I feel like what she did was wrong, since it's a rule of golf and she knowingly disobeyed it. I also don't see her act of cheating as a small thing. I see the actual marginal statistical advantage she gave herself as being small. That doesn't make her actions any better; again I see your point that cheating is cheating. 

Regarding my fragility comment, I used the wrong word. My bad. I meant to say that it's susceptible or more vulnerable to cheating. I didn't mean it in a "weak" or "broken" connotation. It's just susceptible because we have to almost exclusively rely on players' integrity. I also don't like how our sport differentiates itself so far from other sports in that we have no (real) game officials. 

Extending my "small" comment, I find the rule to be kind of... odd, and small. Again, it doesn't take away from her breaking that rule, it's just the rule itself seems laughable. But this thread isn't about the rule itself so I won't go into it any more.

You also say others view cheating as a big deal (implying that I do not). If the game of golf had refs like in other sports (bear with me), would those same people then be okay with what Choi did? Would it not still be cheating? Would it just be "part of the nature of the game, to gain a competitive edge?" 

A deliberate attempt to cheat is not a "small" thing.  If anything, it's a bigger deal in golf than in most other sports because of the expectation by the other players that everyone will play by the same code of honor.  Acts that are regarded as cheating are treated harshly in almost all sports, even those with no such expectation.  The difference is that the definition of cheating is not the same for all sports.

In football, use of specific performance enhancing substances is against the rules, and is considered as cheating.  It has a fairly severe penalty structure.  Using illegal or improperly doctored equipment (see deflate gate) is also treated harshly.  Even repeated or egregious personal fouls can result in ejection and/or suspension and/or fines despite being fully penalized during the game.

Same in baseball.  Corked bats by a hitter or illegally doctoring the ball by a pitcher will get immediate action.  Gambling on baseball is still the most serious offense an MLB player can commit and comes with an automatic lifetime suspension, just ask Pete Rose.  He was never accused of throwing a game like the Black Sox scandal, yet the simple fact that he bet on his team to win got him the boot.

Cheating is broadly defined as committing a deliberate act intended to defraud one's opponent.  In golf that is seen as the lowest of low acts possible.  Therefore suspension and fines should be automatic and guaranteed for any such acts if proven and verified.  Choi's act qualifies.

In most sports which use umpires or referees to manage the play on the field, players will try to ride the fine line between legal play and a foul.  If they slip across the line, they still hope that the ref doesn't catch them, but it isn't cheating because all players on both sides are playing the same way.  They are all under the eyes of the officials.  There are lots of areas in fast moving games where the rule can be subjective, and one ref may call slightly differently from another.  This makes the fouls of the players for the most part unintentional, a mistake or misjudgement, not cheating.

The Rules of Golf attempt to eliminate such subjectivity.  For the most part they are black and white.  In Choi's case there is no room for fudging.  You are required to replace the ball on the same spot from which it was lifted.  The nature of Choi's act made it clear that she intentionally breached that rule.  There is no way she could have done it accidentally.  In my opinion she deserved an object lesson to ensure that she (any other player with a similar idea) was fully aware that such acts would not be tolerated, then or ever.

[fairwayguy2]

On ‎8‎/‎26‎/‎2014 at 3:16 PM, imsys0042 said:

It's like she is in my Saturday group!

LOL, no that would have been a gimmie